It seems to oppose even good ideas like FDI in retail, cash transfer of subsidies etc.

If the party had shown itself to be ‘different’ and behaved a bit statesman-like in the last 3 years as opposition, they would still have my sympathy.

It is a joke that the party call’s itself ‘right-leaning’…

So not sure i want to be friends with them anymore…Of course, i am not saying that the alternative is appealing…

http://www.bloggingbuda.com/2009/03/13/royal-treatment-for-the-adversary/

We need similar organisations in every locality, city, town and village of India.

Jai Ho !

i would beg to disagree.Mr. Dey, perhaps you never visited a polling booth in UP or Bihar when you talk about sick societies. And, just in case you point out to me the battalions of paramilitary forces that turn up to “protect” the sanctity of the electoral process, I would remind you that all poll manipulation does not take place on the day of the elections itself. Not by a long. Most of it is done pre-elections, with the un-unrban, unsophisticate equivalent of-call it lobbying,cabalism…whatever you will.Then there is economics, which you, as an economist, would definitely appreciate.Tell me, in a village of five thousand landless laborers/small farmers, if I am head of a small group of large farmers/landowners who,of course,also double up as money lenders who forms the source of employment in cropping seasons and loans in noncropping seasons when the banks wouldnt look at them to save their lives, which of those poor sods would have the guts to against my wishes and vote for anyone else come election time?And who will the criminals ally with-me of them?And since there will only be so few of me (the vote rigger) compared to him(the poor voter)…what chance does any honest candidate have when he tries to unite the poor voters to their cause as against a “criminal” who tries to unite the riggers? Remember, that to win an election in India, you don’t need at least of half of the votes…you just need one vote more than your closest competitor…so,if you 8 competitors for a particular seat, you just need 12.5% + 1 vote, assuming 100% turnout. Make the turnout 60% (which is more than the optimistic average for any election in India), and the winner needs get only 7.5%+1 vote to be elected.

The undeserving winning the elections is probably the worst thing that could happen to a country. And yes, it is in sick societies where criminals get elected to public office by the electorate, much like the sheep voting in the wolves. But what an electorate! How many of the so called “graduates” produced by our country’s more than 180 universities do you think even understand the meaning of phrases like GDP,GNP,inflation rates,economic policy,economic diplomacy,infrastructure development,human rights,decriminalisation of the legislature and the impact they will have on their day to day life?From what I have seen in my life, (having grown up in a village with abysmal levels of education, and having studied in the so called elite institutions of learning), not even half of even the “educated” people understand or care.Then to expect a barely literate electorate to understand such issues and vote on them sounds a bit profound and parochial.

And as an economist,you would,of course understand the importance of “Indicators”.Sanjay Dutt is an actor with a criminal record.Let us consider two scenarios.

Scenario A: His closest election competitor is just a criminal.Now,Sanjay Dutt also has a criminal past, but that is something remote from me,if I am a voter in a Gorakhpur village, I might or might not remember it, if in the first place, I ever heard of it.And even if I have, my next bet is also a criminal, who has never done anything good for me or anyone in his life.At least this Dutt guy has, even if onscreen, given me some few moments of escape from the gutter reality that I live out everyday.Sometimes,he might even have given me that elusive commodity-Hope.What signals do I get from this?Who do I vote for?

Scenario B: His closest competitor is a normal guy in as much as any politicians are normal guys. Now Dutt has a criminal past, which I may or may not be aware of.But the same argument as above.He has already given me something.Plus he has that awfully misleading intangible called “charisma”.On the other hand, my normal guy politician, who would be my next bet,is just one of a whole procession of such guys I have seen in the past 60 years who have been able to do a whole lot of nothing for my betterment while they come every few years to promise me the sky-this is a category which I generically know to be liars and untrustworthy.Who do I vote for?

I know these scenarios are ridiculously simplified and do not take all variables into account.But the purpose of a model is to be a simplification of reality.While they might not incorporate all factors,they do include a few very important ones.

Saying that we get the government we deserve and so we deserve to get criminals until we as a society rise up and get a collective sense of morality is not only irresponsible, but also cruel, and not something one would expect from somebody of your erudition. One would expect you,of all people, to understand that the people have not been equipped to make that informed,moral choice.How do you expect somebody to make a rational choice on factors which he/she does not understand?So economics and geopolitics and national policy matters get thrown out of the window.That leaves local concerns,petty and irrelevant factors like caste,colour,even visible evidence like whether I like his face or not…which go into making the choice.People make their choice based on factors like “I went to his rally and was not beaten by a policeman/got some laddus to eat”…while in the larger scheme of things it might sound idiotic,on that level it is very real,and a very objective assessment too,because they Dont Have Any Other Tools.

And so, you cannot just call them undeserving because they dont even understand what being deserving means.Yes,since the great uneducated of India,the “sick society” which you refer to, also decide my fate and yours because they are far greater in numbers than you and me, but then it IS a democracy,after all, and number do count.But thats the overriding logic of it all-If you want the decisions of a democracy to make sense and be rational, you must first enable the people who constitute that democracy to see sense and be rational.In other words,you have to educate them and take them above the concerns of survival.Then only can you accuse them of being undeserving,if they make the wrong choice.

P.S. I am sorry if my some of the arguments appear cliched or unformed.I am not an intellectual or thinker or even an economist.My understanding of such matters is very rudimentary and extremely superficial.But I do hope you get my drift, will get my general argument,which must be hidden there somewhere in this immensely verbose comment.I also apologize for writing a comment which has almost reached full blogpost length now.

P.P.S.: I have been a reader of your blog for some time now, and have been an admirer of your views.I still am an admirer of most of your views.But this was one instance where I could not help disagreeing, and from making my disagreement known.